An investigation and analysis on pain in patients with ankylosing spondylitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To investigate and analyze on pain in adult patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Method: 93 adult patients with ankylosing spondylitis were participated. Each patient was assessed by the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire. A correlation was observed between the pain and radiologic changes. Result: The test retest reliability of the short form McGill Pain Questionnaire was good ( interrater intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.85-0.95, P 0.05). The main types of sensory pain were heavy,tender and shooting. The main type of affective pain was tiring exhausting. The intensity scale were mild or moderate. There were no significant correlation between the pain and radiologic changes ( P 0.05). Conclusion: The short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire is reliable to qualitative assess the pain of patients with ankylosing spondylitis. The chronic pain appears to be significantly prevalent in patients with ankylosing spondylitis, and the pain intensity are mild or moderate. These results could help to clinically evaluate and physiotherapeutical treatment in patients with ankylosing spondylitis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".